Printable Format79-1436.
History: L. 1949, ch. 224, § 2; L. 1965, ch. 516, § 2; L. 1967, ch. 489, § 2; L. 1972, ch. 362, § 2; L. 1974, ch. 428, § 1; L. 1982, ch. 397, § 1; L. 1989, ch. 2, § 7 (Special Session); L. 1991, ch. 162, § 8; Repealed, L. 1992, ch. 131, § 10; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Ratio studies may be considered in determining necessity for a reappraisal of property. Board of County Commissioners v. Brookover 198 Kan. 70, 71, 77, 422 P.2d 906.
2. Assessment and valuation of property are administrative in character; absent evidence that assessment was arrived at fraudulently, arbitrarily or capriciously, a difference of opinion as to value doesn't warrant judicial interference. Cities Service Oil Co. v. Murphy, 202 Kan. 282, 291, 295, 447 P.2d 791.
3. Ratio study held not conclusive evidence in considering valuation of interstate gas pipeline and distribution property. Northern Natural Gas Co. v. Dwyer, 208 Kan. 337, 339, 492 P.2d 147.
4. Referred to; assessment of property at 43% of fair market value arbitrary and oppressive. Gordon v. Hiett, 214 Kan. 690, 692, 522 P.2d 942.